Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 675 posts

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#351

Post by lotsofpulp »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #236
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally anyone below director level makes sense imho. The biggest advocate of pay rises and improvements to conditions is often the line level managers and those one step up from the line level managers. If this is a typical corporate job title this is a manager of line level managers. He probably has quarterly 1:1s or at least office hours supporting those at the lowest levels. It’s not like you become a line leve…

There's been a sucessful corporate ruse to make line level managers seem above line level workers and make line level works side against line level mamagers, while both sides are of the same labor class.

I consider anyone who doesn’t have the power to spend money a supervisor (or someone whose role is to cover in the event of short staffing) instead of a manager. What are you even managing if you can’t spend a little more to ensure you have the people you need?

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#352

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #313
mensetmanusman wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because dei and the nyt focus on that being important.

[flagged]

> Feels like [feelings about dei]

It's an issue of competence.

Having cleared the lowest bar, society is demonstrably less racist than a century ago. The next bar is much more difficult; we may be less equipped than we were for the last one.

We can measure some more nuanced outcomes of racism. Past that we are struggling to even qualify successes and failures. Instances & causes remain tied to systems & psychology that seem too complex for current skill sets to parse well. As a result, poor performance and less-poor performance are happening all at once.

At this level of the challenge, failure is one of the best learning tools at our disposal. Bad actors are quick to see that and are doing what they have always done - exploiting our poor valuation of failures to derail progress.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#353

Post by dialup_sounds »

janalsncm wrote: post #258

It should tell you something that 95% of the union voted to strike. I found more information from them here: https://www.nyguild.org/post/new-york-times-tech-guild-votes... I wonder how other news outlets will cover this, if at all. They’re probably afraid others will get the same idea.

The source says that 89% of members voted and it passed by 95%, which is about 85% of the union, not 95% of the union.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#354

Post by giantg2 »

brianwawok wrote: post #179
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> urgency on the workers' part is to lock up contracts before the election in order to prevent mass layoffs right after. If workers fear mass layoffs, going on strike is a bad idea. Instead, in such a situation the union should attempt to make an agreement with the employer of the kind "no salary increase (as it would be appropriate in consideration of the inflation), but job security for the next years".

Which is a great way to have a company full of people who can’t be fired with no motivation, harming the parent organization

Usually people can still be fired if they aren't performing their contractual obligations. That might get tricky for stuff like code, but the same can be said of the current performance structure.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#355

Post by eli_gottlieb »

aurareturn wrote: post #267
janalsncm wrote: post #258

It should tell you something that 95% of the union voted to strike. I found more information from them here: https://www.nyguild.org/post/new-york-times-tech-guild-votes... I wonder how other news outlets will cover this, if at all. They’re probably afraid others will get the same idea.

Isn’t it a little ironic that NY Times, and most east coast media, is very anti big tech and pro union while their own employees are protesting because of low wages? Who are they to judge how big tech treats their employees when they pay their own so poorly?

When the bloody hell has the New York Times been pro-union?

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#357

Post by Rinzler89 »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #352
Rinzler89 wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Feels like [feelings about dei] It's an issue of competence. Having cleared the lowest bar, society is demonstrably less racist than a century ago. The next bar is much more difficult; we may be less equipped than we were for the last one. We can measure some more nuanced outcomes of racism. Past that we are struggling to even qualify successes and failures. Instances & causes remain tied to systems & psychology th…

[flagged]

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#358

Post by aleph_minus_one »

siffin wrote: post #307
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Saying "no" for two years is not a negotiation. What does the other side offer? If you want something from the other side, you better have something to offer which the other side wants: "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No." "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No." "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No." "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No."

What you say is very true, but you're still missing the definition of a negotiation. The example you gave isn't negotiation. This is: "Give me a million USD, and I will smile!" - "No. That's unreasonable, I'll give you 100,000, and you'll dance each time you see me.". "Make it 300,000,and I'll fake that I like you." ...etc Negotiating goes both ways.

Blocking off the other side is also a negotiation strategy; one that one applies for example if one considers the demands of the other side to be nutjob insane.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#359

Post by xingped »

_cs2017_ wrote: post #348

How much of a comp boost would an average NYT tech worker get if the union succeeded? Let's say 10% for the sake of the argument. Please correct me if I'm way off. Wouldn't they be able to get a much higher comp by interviewing with other local tech firms? If so, why don't they? Seems more effective than waiting and hoping for a small increase through the union.

This is such a weird response. Do you collectively interview for other jobs? No. Would you tell any other union this? No. Collectively bargain for your current job and raise the standards for everyone now and in the future. I don't know why tech is so hyper-individualist.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#360

Post by discmonkey »

_cs2017_ wrote: post #348

How much of a comp boost would an average NYT tech worker get if the union succeeded? Let's say 10% for the sake of the argument. Please correct me if I'm way off. Wouldn't they be able to get a much higher comp by interviewing with other local tech firms? If so, why don't they? Seems more effective than waiting and hoping for a small increase through the union.

Humans tend to like to stay at there they are, in the tech context especially. It takes a long time relative to the length of a career to learn new systems, make new connections, and achieve some level of independence at a new job. There's also relatively few jobs that at least pretend to be somewhat beneficial to the world while paying somewhat competitive salaries (I can't think of any that I've worked at). Then there's relationships you may have developed with your colleagues.

Finally, if everyone just leaves their jobs without trying to improve them, won't everyone run out of places to jump to eventually?

Post reply on HN